Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Sheer meanness

This simply boggles my mind:

Democrats were outraged Wednesday morning when Republican state Sen. Dave Schultheis said he planned to vote against a bill to require HIV tests for pregnant women because the disease “stems from sexual promiscuity” and he didn’t think the Legislature should “remove the negative consequences that take place from poor behavior and unacceptable behavior.” The Colorado Springs lawmaker then proceeded to cast the lone vote against SB 179, which passed 32-1 and moves on to the House.

“HIV does not just come from sexual promiscuity, it comes from many other things — contaminated blood, for one,” fired back one of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Lois Tochtrop, after Schultheis spoke on the Senate floor.

“What this bill will do and why it’s so important to test the woman when she is pregnant — if she is HIV positive, treatment is started immediately to protect the baby, the unborn baby,” the Thornton Democrat, who is also a nurse, said.

So even if it did only come from sexual promiscuity, does that mean we punish the baby?

Also, suppose a woman was a virgin when she got married but her husband had picked up HIV while "sowing his wild oats" before marriage. Do we punish both the mother and the baby for what the father once did and (let's presume) now regrets?

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous11:57 AM

    The only bright spot in this is at least he was the only dissenting vote. The scary thing is there are others out there who would agree with him.
    Carolyn L.


New policy: Anonymous posts must be signed or they will be deleted. Pick a name, any name (it could be Paperclip or Doorknob), but identify yourself in some way. Thank you.